<<Steve, curing any of the serious maladies you mentioned is a
constructive endeavor.  You are confusing the issue of changing something
for no other reason than to create confusion versus changing something
because it needs to change.>>


Obviously, I don't agree. As I mentioned, my concern is in having someone
declare a discussion "pointless" on the grounds that "we've always (or,
in this case, for a significantly shorter period of time) done it that
way". Such an argument is, in my mind, always defective. Which is
completely different from considering such longevity, and the reasons for
it, as part of the discussion.

A constructive examination of alternatives is seldom inappropriate, even
when, as in this case, the outcome is virtually guaranteed to be "leave
things the way they are". But I think it is important that such decisions
be arrived at *after* an informed examination of the alternatives.

Steve